Mr. Speaker, hundreds of Canadians from across our great land have gathered in Ottawa to honour Maher Arar and Monia Mazigh and pay tribute to their sacrifice. Tonight parliamentarians and fellow Canadians will express their gratitude and appreciation to the Arar family for their commitment to justice and fairness.

At a time when some people would choose to shy away from defending justice when a label of terrorism is attached, Monia, Maher and their supporters taught us many important lessons. These lessons are especially relevant now in light of the recent debate on the anti-terrorism motion.

I think it is appropriate that we are celebrating the Arars' sacrifice on Valentine's Day. Their love for each other and for their family, their country, Canadian values and the pursuit of justice shall remain an inspiration to all of us.

No amount of financial reward could ever compensate them for their ordeal, but if we truly want to honour them and benefit from their tragic experience, the best way to honour them would be to ensure that it never happens again.

Mr. Speaker, today we will be debating Bill C-27, which fixes the process for designating dangerous offenders. Provincial attorneys general, police and victims groups have been calling for this bill, but so far the opposition is determined to kill the bill and confuse the public by calling it a three strikes bill.

Bill C-27 is an important part of a series of government bills aimed at making our streets and communities safer from violent criminals. As an MP who meets regularly with victims and as a member of the justice committee, I am deeply frustrated at how long it is taking to pass these bills.

Yesterday the president of the Canadian Police Association said:

Police officers across the country see people that are victimized by violent, repeat offenders. These bills will keep dangerous criminals from returning to the streets, and help protect our communities...We are simply asking MPs to act on their commitments and help police officers do their jobs.

Every one of us made a commitment to Canadians in the last election to get tough on crime. I urge opposition members to get busy and meet their commitment.

Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister has confirmed our worst suspicions on this issue. The government has changed the selection rules for the judicial advisory committees. It has taken away the voice of the judiciary during the candidate evaluation process.

Why is the Prime Minister changing the rules? Why is he showing so little respect for the independence and authority of the judiciary?

Mr. Speaker, on the contrary, this government has established a process that is indeed independent, with the participation of a number of voices, including the voice of the police who have to enforce our laws. It is important for our government to select top-notch judges to help us keep our streets and communities safer.

Once again, Mr. Speaker, this government has made a number of appointments to the bench of people of very high quality. In fact, these were people who were all recommended by a selection process put in place by the previous government.

It is very different to select people based on diverse input and based on merit rather than the previous system, where Benoît Corbeil told CBC radio that for all intents and purposes judgeships were available to those who gave the most money to the Liberal Party.

Mr. Speaker, former Supreme Court Justice Claire L'Heureux-Dubé, has criticized the Americanization of our justice system following the changes made by the Conservatives for the selection of judges. She said, “Changing the composition of these committees...introduces what I think to be a rather pernicious element, which is the ideology of the candidate”.

Why does this government want to skew the role of the committees in favour of ideological appointments? What will be the next step in the Conservative plan? Electing judges like they do in the United States?

Mr. Speaker, I would like to point out to members of the Liberal Party that there have been a number of changes over the years since these were introduced by a previous Conservative government in 1988. I believe there were four different modifications, and I think all of them have improved the process.

I do not see what the problem is with the members of the Liberal Party. If they do not think the police have anything constructive to offer to the judicial system, then let them make that point, because they are certainly making it here in the House and I could not disagree with them more.

Mr. Speaker, the Conservative government has infiltrated the judicial appointment committees to better advance its right-wing ideology. This is a direct threat to hard won rights: women's right to equality and free choice, minorities' right to be treated fairly, the right to same-sex marriage.

The stakes are too high to be dismissed. This is something never before seen in Canada. Will the government accept the proposal from former Justice L'Heureux-Dubé, to hold a public debate in which average citizens would be involved?

Mr. Speaker, this government announced the Canada Ecotrust program to support major projects in the provinces, in order to limit and reduce air pollutants and greenhouse gases. It is an important program. As I indicated to several premiers, including the Premier of Alberta, our intention is to distribute those funds per capita.

Mr. Speaker, if the government's shift to green thinking is serious, it should immediately do away with the gifts it gives to the oil companies, such as the tax benefits—Bill C-48 comes to mind—and the tax reductions that will allow oil companies to reduce their income tax payments by $3 billion between 2005 and 2008.

Will the Prime Minister finally do away with the tax benefits granted to oil companies or will he continue to help them, those poor folks?